May 2016 Archives

Last time, we took a brief look at Ohio's negligent credentialing statute and the requirements it sets forth regarding proof of negligent credentialing. As we noted, hospitals are presumed to have done their due diligence in matters of provider credentialing in certain circumstances unless it can be proven otherwise by contrary evidence.

In recent posts, we've been looking at a case which highlights a couple important issues in the area of medical malpractice: the impact of medical peer review privilege on medical malpractice litigation and physician credentialing.

In our last post, we began looking at an out-of-state case which is being appealed to the Supreme Court involving the issue of medical peer review privilege, and whether there should be an exception to the privilege when physicians and hospitals are found to have engaged in fraud. The case is interesting because of the issues it raises with regard to hospitals' liability for physician negligence.

A legal battle out in South Dakota highlights some of the issues we've recently discussed on this blog, particularly the connection between medical negligence and hospital negligence. As we've noted previously, hospitals which allow physicians to continue in their practice despite misconduct and negligence can be held liable for their own negligence.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.